Saturday, June 13, 2009

In Defense of Clerics

Since I started to connect with the RPG community on the net, especially those interested in old-school gaming, I have found that the Cleric is not a very popular class. This dislike ranges from the ambivalence of James over at Grognardia to the elimination of the class in Geoffrey McKinney's Carcosa to Delta's outright glee of removing the class from his gaming. Now, I am not going to say that any of these interpretations of the game are wrong. In fact, I appreciate the fact that each of them is coming at the game from the perspective of the S&S roots of D&D. I even use James' interpretation of the class as a kind of Magic User when dealing with non-Christian/pagan priests. However, there is another perspective: the historical simulation in the war gaming roots of D&D.

I have to admit that I played my first war game before I ever heard of D&D and in my adult life have played as many hours war gaming as I have role-playing, if not more. I am also a trained historian. Thus, this aspect of the game's roots really speaks to me and I emphasize it in my games.

When looking at the game from the perspective of historic simulation, the Cleric deserves its place in the game. Not only has religion been central to every culture in human history, but Christianity has been a major factor in European history and culture since the second century. One need only look at the weapons and armor in D&D to realize that the combat being simulated is based primarily on the way war was fought in Medieval Europe, when Christianity was not only dominant, but assumed.

The spell list for Clerics in D&D reflect this historic reality — they simulate the kinds of miracles that fill Christian lore. When you believe that every Christian is the temple of God Himself, in the person of the Holy Spirit, then daily miracles are not out of place.

In terms of the classic D&D paradigm of Law vs. Chaos, Christianity has historically been equated with Law and civilization in Europe. When Rome fell, it was the Church that sheltered and protected people. It was the Church that protected the vestiges of civilization — books, scrolls, etc. — because it valued things like science, philosophy and education.

History is full of Christian adventurers. Monastics travelled the wilderness — the Biblical realm of demons — in order to take on the devil where he lives. Missionaries travelled into barbarian lands to spread the Gospel. They followed the example of the Apostles, who travelled as far as India in the east, and Britain in the west. Before them, the prophets took on all manner of ancient armies and pagan gods.

I will grant that S&S often seems incompatible, indifferent or even hostile to Christianity. Given this, the Cleric seems out of place. However, S&S itself provides the answer as to why the Cleric has a solid place in D&D — the genre blending that S&S is so comfortable with. Given that one standard fantasy trope is to tell stories of earth's distant future and given that the Church is not just a human institution, but also a divine one — "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18) — the Church easily fits into any world that depicts a future earth because the Church will survive into that future. Indeed, this is the model I use in my Erimia campaign.

Whether or not you use the Cleric in your games is largely up to how much you want to pay homage to the historic simulation of war games at the root of D&D. Whereas it is possible to say that I don't want Clerics in my game, it is impossible to say that Clerics don't belong at all. I hope that some of you will explore the historic simulation roots of our hobby and learn to embrace the Cleric as gleefully as I have.

5 comments:

There is no source for them from the literary tradition D&D drew from, nor from the medieval history. Yes, there is frequent mention of Archbishop Turpin (the Battling’ Bishop!), but he wasn’t a D&D Cleric. There isn’t any real source for the spell-casting, mace-wielding, cleric. It’s sui generis. That’s not a bad thing as such, lots of cool D&D things are creations of the game itself (Rod of Lordly Might!), but it seems to exist solely to give a weapon against undead (take that Sir Fang!) and be a source of healing.

I’d argue that the role is so nebulous that even Gary and folks didn’t get it, because the Paladin came about very quickly and that class is much more aligned with Archbishop Turpin and the Knights Templar and whatnot.

I'll grant you that the D&D class itself doesn't appear to be an historic reality, but it is a wonderful simulation of an historic amalgam for a fantasy setting. The characteristics that make up the Cleric are all there in history — the Knights Templar, etc., Christian adventurers, and the miracles performed through the saints. The sticky point is the latter, because history tends to discount such things. However, if one relies on the witness of the Church herself, miracles are not these rare, supernatural, grab you by the throat kind of occurrences, but rather the normal, everyday reality of living with God — For nothing will be impossible with God (Luke 1:37). In context of a medieval fantasy setting, the role is more than an appropriate fit.

"There is no source for them from the literary tradition D&D drew from, nor from the medieval history."

Errr. The Lives of the Saints? Wandering priests fight and tame terrible monsters, convert the heathen, and usually die in some hilariously overblown manner.

Saint Wilgefortis and her miraculous beard; St Denis and his stubborn refusal to acknowledge a severed head was more than a mere flesh wound; St Cadog transforming wolves into stones and burying bandits alive.

The D&D-style cleric might not be pure S&S, but the militant holy man has an honoured origin in the same cultural traditions that gave us all the other D&D archetypes.

Chris said:Errr. The Lives of the Saints? Wandering priests fight and tame terrible monsters, convert the heathen, and usually die in some hilariously overblown manner.

First, let me say that I definitely don't find this the most important thing ever. So if I sound too worked up at any point, please forgive. It is, after all, a game. Do what thou wilt.

OK, that out of the way: the problem I always have with this discussion is that "the Cleric" is NOT a Saint, a Priest, a Templar, or anythign else. It has pieces of all of them, but they aren't what it is. What it is is a blessedly goofy amalgalm of atrocious historical interpetation of Odo on the Bayeaux Tapestry and Van Helsing in the Hammer Dracula films of the 70's.

But that is awfully hard to recall which is actually the biggest source of anti-clercalism for me: the game very quickly made ALL priests as Clerics. Which is so goofy I just can't stand it. You end up with the situation where doddering, old patricarchs have to be presented as high-level Clerics, which means that they can whip ass with a non-pointy stick seven way to Sunday.

In my current campaign, I actually allows Clerics under the provisos that A)the class would called "Champion", B)Champions might or might not be priests, C) 99% of priest are just Normal Men, not Champions, and D)the majority of Wizards are priests because they are the only ones literate in my mostly-medieval setting. I'm okay with the class given those changes.

However, next game, I'm going to eliminate even the Champion class and combine the spell lists into just one. Most Wizards are priests for the reason given above (which, not to be pedantic, is the actual case for the High Medieval period). Fighters, Theives, MU's--they can all be priests. Finally, I'm going to try out my idea to give 4th level Fighters (level title: Heroes) the option to become Clerics/Champions/Paladins/Templars/whatever.

the game very quickly made ALL priests as Clerics. Which is so goofy I just can't stand it.

Actually, the game did no such thing — the people who played the game did (which is one of the basic premises of why we like the old school style in the first place). However, I myself find this premise to be irritating from the Christian perspective that pagan priests are nothing more than dressed up Magic Users.

You end up with the situation where doddering, old patricarchs have to be presented as high-level Clerics, which means that they can whip ass with a non-pointy stick seven way to Sunday.

Out of curiosity, how many old, doddering Patriarchs have you actually met? All the old, doddering hierarchs I've met in my life have given me this very impression. In a weird way, they remind me of Yoda — he could kick your butt if he wanted to, he just chooses not to.